Abstract
Objective
To assess whether robot-assisted reach training (RART) with an active assistant protocol
can improve upper extremity function and kinematic performance in chronic stroke survivors.
Design
This study was conducted as a randomized controlled trial.
Setting
National rehabilitation center.
Participants
Chronic stroke survivors (N=38) were randomized into 2 groups: a robot-assisted reach
training with assist-as-needed (RT-AAN) group and a robot-assisted reach training
with guidance force (RT-G) group.
Intervention
The RT-AAN group received robot-assisted reach training with an assist-as-needed mode
for 40 minutes per day, 3 times per week over a 6-week period, and the RT-G group
participated in the RART with a guidance mode for 40 minutes per day, 3 times per
week over a 6-week period.
Main Outcome Measures
Upper extremity functions were measured with Fugl–Meyer Assessment (FMA), Action Research
Arm Test (ARAT), and Box and Block Test. In addition, movement velocities were measured
as an index for upper extremity kinematic performances in 6 directions.
Results
Both groups showed significant improvements in FMA, ARAT, and kinematics (movement
velocity) in all directions (targets 1-6, P<.05). However, the RT-AAN group showed significantly more improvement than the RT-G
group in FMA and ARAT (P<.05).
Conclusions
RART with an active assistant protocol showed improvements of upper extremity function
and kinematic performance in chronic stroke survivors. In particular, assist-as-needed
robot control was effective for upper extremity rehabilitation. Therefore robot-assisted
training may be suggested as an effective intervention to improve upper extremity
function in chronic stroke survivors.
Keywords
List of abbreviations:
AAN (assist-as-needed), ARAT (Action Research Arm Test), BBT (Box and Block Test), FMA (Fugl–Meyer Assessment), RART (robot-assisted reach training), RT-AAN (robot-assisted reach training with assist-as-needed), RT-G (robot-assisted reach training with guidance force), WAM (whole arm manipulator)To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2017; 31: 107-121
- What is the evidence for physical therapy poststroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS One. 2014; 9e87987
- Treatment interventions for the paretic upper limb of stroke survivors: a critical review.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2003; 17: 220-226
- Positive effects of robotic exoskeleton training of upper limb reaching movements after stroke.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2012; 9: 36-52
- Does provision of extrinsic feedback result in improved motor learning in the upper limb poststroke? A systematic review of the evidence.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010; 24: 113-124
- Electromechanical and robot-assisted arm training for improving generic activities of daily living, arm function, and arm muscle strength after stroke.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; 6: CD006876
- Effects of robot-assisted therapy on upper limb recovery after stroke: a systematic review.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008; 22: 111-121
- Robot-assisted movement training compared with conventional therapy techniques for the rehabilitation of upper-limb motor function after stroke.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83: 952-959
- Effects of robot-assisted upper limb rehabilitation in stroke patients: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Neurol Sci. 2017; 38: 1561-1569
- Understanding adaptive motor control of the paretic upper limb early poststroke: the EXPLICIT-stroke program.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013; 27: 854-863
- Effects of robotic therapy of the arm after stroke.Lancet Neurol. 2014; 13: 132-133
- Impact of visual error augmentation when integrated with assist-as-needed training method in robot-assisted rehabilitation.IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2010; 18: 571-579
- Robotics, motor learning, and neurologic recovery.Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2004; 6: 497-525
- Guidelines for adult stroke rehabilitation and recovery.Stroke. 2016; 47: 98-169
- Robot-assisted reach training for improving upper extremity function of chronic stroke.Tohoku J Exp Med. 2015; 237: 149-155
- Feedback training using a non-motorized device for long-term upper extremity impairment after stroke: a single group study.J Phys Ther Sci. 2016; 28: 495-499
- Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor function after stroke.Stroke. 2011; 42: 427-432
- A standardized approach to performing the action research arm test.Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2008; 22: 78-90
- Validation of the Box and Block Test as a measure of dexterity of elderly people: reliability, validity, and norms studies.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994; 75: 751-755
- Robotic assist-as-needed as an alternative to therapist-assisted gait rehabilitation.Int J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016; 4: 370
- Assist-as-needed robot-aided gait training improves walking function in individuals following stroke.IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2015; 23: 956-963
- Adaptive assist-as-needed controller to improve gait symmetry in robot-assisted gait training.IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Hong Kong, 2014: 724-729
- Comparison of exercise training effect with different robotic devices for upper limb rehabilitation: a retrospective study.Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2017; 53: 240-248
Article info
Publication history
Published online: October 26, 2018
Footnotes
Clinical Trials Registration No.: KCT0001568.
Supported by the Research Program (grant nos. NRCRI13-A-04, NRCTR-IN13004, NRCTR-IN14006, NRCTR-IN15005, NRCTR-IN16005, NRCTR-IN17006, NRCTR-IN18006) of the National Rehabilitation Center, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Republic of Korea.
Disclosures: none.
Identification
Copyright
© 2018 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine
